Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The practical argument for God's existence is decisive — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The practical argument for God's existence is decisive

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Belief in God is required as a postulate of practical reason to make rational sense of moral obligation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The theoretical arguments for God's existence fail
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Practical reason can ground belief where theoretical reason cannot
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's own critical framework prohibits constitutive metaphysical claims from practical reason, limiting postulates to regulative use only.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A regulative postulate that God exists for moral coherence does not license the further claim that God actually exists as a decisive theoretical matter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The practical argument therefore cannot be 'decisive' without collapsing the very theoretical/practical distinction Kant invokes to save it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral obligation can be grounded in contractualist or constructivist frameworks—Rawls, Korsgaard—without any theological postulate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If alternative secular groundings of moral rationality are coherent, the argument's first premise that God is *required* fails by modus tollens.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedFree Will & Foreknowledge1 linked

    Related

    A regulative postulate that God exists for moral coherence does not license the ...Belief in God is required as a postulate of practical reason to make rational se...If alternative secular groundings of moral rationality are coherent, the argumen...Kant's own critical framework prohibits constitutive metaphysical claims from pr...
    +4 moreShow less
    Moral obligation can be grounded in contractualist or constructivist frameworks—...Practical reason can ground belief where theoretical reason cannotThe practical argument therefore cannot be 'decisive' without collapsing the ver...

    Similar

    Postulating God's existence is a theoretical exercise of reason82%Any argument for including necessary existence in the idea of God must...82%The existence of God is required to resolve the dualism of practical r...81%No known ontological argument for the existence of God is persuasive.81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: religion-morality
    View source passageHide passage
    Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is the most important figure of the Enlightenment in Germany, but his project is different in many ways from those of his French contemporaries. He was brought up in a pietist Lutheran family, and his system retains many features from, for example, Crusius. But he was also indebted through Wolff to Leibniz. Moreover, he was ‘awoken from his dogmatic slumbers’ by reading Hume, though Kant is referring here to Hume's attack on causation, not his ethical theory (Prolegomen
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    The theoretical arguments for God's existence fail
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit